ArticleEuropean heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy2022
Outcomes after delayed primary percutaneous coronary intervention vs. pharmaco-invasive strategy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in Norway.
Article in European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reperfusion Strategy of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-Analysis of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Pharmaco-Invasive Therapy.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Ten-year target lesion failure in patients treated with primary PCI: results from DANAMI-3.Open heart · 2025Trial
- Impact of Wechat-based prehospital data transmission on reperfusion times in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a prospective observational study.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Article
- Helicopter emergency medical services for interfacility transfers: an Italian expert consensus.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- AsistIAM: Innovating the Acute Coronary Syndrome Approach in Primary Care Settings.Clinical cardiology · 2026Article
- Pathways of Care for Patients Who Undergo Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for STEMI: A Review of "Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- A contemporary overview of emergency myocardial infarction hospitalizations with primary percutaneous coronary intervention in Brazil: regional trends of costs and outcomes.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- The Irreversible March of Time: Ischemic Delay and Impact on Outcomes in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- The relation between delayed reperfusion treatment and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a national prospective cohort study.European heart journal open · 2025Article
- Article
- Ethnic Disparities of Arrival Following ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction in South Israel.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Time trends in incidence, treatment, and outcome in acute myocardial infarction in Norway 2013-19.European heart journal open · 2022Article
- Prognosis in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Reperfused by PHDP: 1-Year MACEs Follow-Up.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsPrimary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) is the preferred reperfusion strategy in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) provided it can be performed within 120 min from diagnosis. However, it is unclear whether pPCI or a pharmaco-invasive (P-I) strategy is the best choice in patients who cannot receive timely pPCI. The aim of the present study was to compare outcomes after delayed and late pPCI vs. a P-I strategy in STEMI patients who did not receive timely pPCI. METHODS AND
resultsAll patients with STEMI registered in the Norwegian Myocardial Infarction Registry (NORMI) between 2013 and 2019, with ≤12 h from symptom onset to first medical contact and available timelines were included in the study. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and follow-up was through 2019. A total of 21 121 (27% of 78 368) STEMI patients were registered in the NORMI. Among patients who met the inclusion criteria, 7238 (54%) patients underwent timely pPCI, 1537 (11%) delayed pPCI (121-180 min), 1012 (7%) late pPCI (>180 min), and 2338 (17%) patients were treated with a P-I strategy. After a median follow-up time of 2.5 years, mortality was higher in the delayed pPCI [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-1.5] and in the late pPCI group (adjusted HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.7) compared to the P-I strategy group, but bleeding complications were more frequent after P-I strategy.
conclusionsIn STEMI patients who did not receive timely percutaneous coronary intervention, a P-I strategy seemed to be associated with better long-term survival compared to delayed/late pPCI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.